DOCUMENTS AND PUBLICATIONS
European Commission of Human Rights:
- Decision as to the admissibility of Application No. 20809/92 by X. against Sweden, 15.2.93; available at PFE.
X. is a Peruvian citizen and member of the the "civil" branch of "Sendero Luminoso". After detention including heavy torture he left Peru and applied for asylum in Sweden. His application was turned down by the Swedish government on the grounds that he had "worked for an organisation which, according to what is known, is responsible for several grave acts of cruelty in Peru. Even if [X.] has not participated in any such activities, he has still worked for an organisation whose methods must be considered to fall within the scope of Article 1 F of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees which deals with cases where the Convention's protection does not apply." As a consequence the government ordered the expulsion of X. A new application to the Immigration Board was equally turned down.
In his application to the European Commission of Human Rights the applicant maintained that his expulsion to Peru would violate Art. 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Commission rejected the application on the grounds that a "mere possibility of ill-treatment contrary to Article 3 is not in itself sufficient in this context" and that X. had failed to substantiate his claim that he would be exposed to a "real risk" in case of his expulsion. (With regard to Peruvian refugees in Sweden, see FECL No.9, p.3).
- Decision as to the admissibility of Application No. 20547/92 by Y. and Others against Sweden, 15.2.93; available at PFE.
Rejection of the application of Y.and others, Peruvian citizens, on similar grounds. Y. is the son of a well-known dissident killed a massacre of prisoners by Peruvian police in 1986. Y. and his wife were active members of the "Committee of relatives of Political Prisoners" accused by the Peruvian government of "having contacts" with Sendero Luminoso, an allegation refuted by the applicants. Y. also claimed that he had been repeatedly detained and tortured, a claim supported by medical and psychiatrical certificates.
In its considerations the Commission stated, among other things, that "while the applicants' allegation that the first applicant has previously been subjected to treatment contrary to article 3 [torture] has found some support in certain evidence... this in itself does not suffice to conclude that he would now face a real risk of again being submitted to such treatment should the applicants be returned to Peru."
Draft recommendation by the Working Party for the development of proposals for implementing recommendations prepared by the Berlin Conference to prevent uncontrolled migration (Berlin Group); 3rd Session, Bonn, 12/13.1.93 (Doc III/9, english); available at PFE.
Recommendations of the Conference to Prevent Uncontrolled Migration, Budapest, 15/16.2.93 (PE 203.656/Ann.); available at PFE.
Recommendation regarding practices followed by Member States on expulsion, by the Ministers responsible for immigration, meeting in London on 30.11/1.12.92 (10579/92 IMMIG 2); available at PFE.
Chapters: General policy; Restrictions on personal liberty; Documentation; Re-admission agreements; Prosecution of facilitaors of illegal entrants and those who harbour people who have entered or remained unlawfully, and action against those who employ illegal entrants; Confiscation of modes of transport used by those who facilitate illegal entrants; Transit during the course of expulsion; Escorts; Selection, training and equipment of those involved in expulsion; Exchange of information. (with regard to the London Conference, see also FECL No.11, pp.1-3 and p.10).
Ad hoc Group Immigration: Harmonisation of national policies on admission for employment, Draft resolution fro adopting by Immigration Ministers of Member States of the EC meeting inter-governmentally on 30.11./1.12 (London). SN 3611/92 WGI 1165, Brussels, 24.7.92; confidential.
No definitive agreement was reached on this subject in London.